Tidy strange code in jit.py

[albi3ro]

Context:

Trying to understand how transforms get passed around in the catalyst frontend. This code was confusing, and I think it is dead code. So let's try getting rid of the dead logic.

Description of the Change:

Benefits:

Possible Drawbacks:

Related GitHub Issues:

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.39%. Comparing base (07add14) to head (2df8ea8).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2135      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.39%   97.39%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          91       91              
  Lines       10610    10608       -2     
  Branches      999      999              
==========================================
- Hits        10334    10332       -2     
  Misses        218      218              
  Partials       58       58              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[github-actions]

Hello. You may have forgotten to update the changelog!
Please edit doc/releases/changelog-dev.md on your branch with:

• A one-to-two sentence description of the change. You may include a small working example for new features.
• A link back to this PR.
• Your name (or GitHub username) in the contributors section.

[dime10]

Is this worth trying out then?

Suggested change

	params["pass_pipeline"] = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
	default_pass_pipeline = self.compile_options.circuit_transform_pipeline
	pass_pipeline = kwargs.pop("pass_pipeline", default_pass_pipeline)
	params["pass_pipeline"] = pass_pipeline

[albi3ro]

So how would we hit that?

Also, seems like that might be a new feature we would have to document and test.

[dime10]

Didn't you say PassPipelineWrapper is generating the pass_pipeline kwarg? There is also evidence that we expect a pass_pipeline kwarg in qnodes here and here.

I'm not sure I see a new feature, just obviously buggy code that very likely doesn't match the intent of the author who wrote it. Maybe you're thinking of a new feature because this kwarg could be provided by users as well? But to me it looks like the kwarg is used an internal "secret" parameter rather than a user facing one.